[ Post a Response | Royal Jewels of the World Message Board ]
I can see the Gloucester children selling the biggest pieces (or giving them to the nation) to cover inheritance tax and keeping smaller pieces in the family. Sell the Indian-style tiara, keep the Iveagh, for example.
The sovereign-to-sovereign arrangement is the most likely way the private jewels were handed down. They would have had to give a "bequest" some number of years before the giver's death --seven?--to avoid inheritance tax. 
Previous Message
For a long time now I have held a view about the Impressive Gloucester jewels.
In the event of the death of the Duke the death duties on the estate could be enormous simply from the value of the jewels alone. The most impressive pieces would have to be sold unless there is an arrangement for them to given to the Royal Collection, in lieu of part or all of death duties.
There could even be some such arrangement or understanding in force now with provision for the jewels to be worn for the lifetime of the current Duchess.
Note that the Royal Collection is always held in trust by the Sovereign.
Quote: " The Royal Collection is held in trust by The King as Sovereign for his successors and the nation. It is not owned by him as a private individual ."
Source link: under "Who are we"
https://www.rct.uk/collection/about-the-collection
The Royal Collection Trust says " We’re a charity caring for the Royal Collection and looking after visitors to the royal palaces. " Source: the same web page.
Of course that leaves the quite separate and oft-debated topic of who owns the jewels of the late Queen Elizabeth II.
I think it is the King as a private individual but will we ever be given clear information about the matter?
630
on July 6, 2024, 8:50 am, in reply to "